April 2017 - AMSAT-BB - mailman.amsat.org

SatTrak IV and St_Utility program.
by Ed Williams 21 Apr '17

21 Apr '17

Hi, I have obtained two Kiron SatTrak IV controllers and I am hoping that someone hasor can tell me where the St_Utility program might be obtained. Please contact me off list if you can provide any information on this unit. Thanks in advance for the assistance. kn4kl(a)arrl.net 73, de KN4KL ed EX: KG4KL & W1AW/KG4

1 0

Duchifat-2 + PocketQube Workshop Slides
by M5AKA 21 Apr '17

21 Apr '17

Israeli High School Students Build CubeSat Duchifat-2 https://amsat-uk.org/2017/04/21/israeli-high-school-students-cubesat/ PocketQube Workshop presentation slides released and video of OzQube-1 presentation https://amsat-uk.org/2017/04/21/pocketqube-workshop-presentation-slides-rel… South African QB50 CubeSats https://amsat-uk.org/2017/04/15/south-african-qb50-cubesats/ Low-Cost 10 GHz SSB Receiver https://amsat-uk.org/2017/04/21/low-cost-10-ghz-ssb-receiver/ IARU Satellite Frequency Coordination status pages http://www.amsat.org.uk/iaru/ Trevor M5AKA ---- AMSAT-UK http://amsat-uk.org/ Twitter https://twitter.com/AmsatUK Facebook https://facebook.com/AmsatUK YouTube https://youtube.com/AmsatUK ----

1 0

FO-29 Satellite Demo Video of W4FS by KN4AQ HamRadioNow
by John Brier 21 Apr '17

21 Apr '17

https://youtu.be/kEvsKN9ZSyw Gary KN4AQ's YouTube channel, HamRadioNow: https://www.youtube.com/user/HamRadioNow Gary's video of the pass and interview with us is coming in the next few days. Check back here for the link when it goes live. Thanks to Tucker, W4FS, for doing the demo, Gary KN4AQ, for collaborating with me, Dennis, NC4DK, and Ian Hewitt, from Raleigh Amateur Radio Society for helping me set this up. Thanks also to Clayton, W5PFG for the audio recording of this pass. http://www.rars.org/ 73, John Brier KG4AKV

1 0

Handheld radio and headset interface
by Mike Thompson 21 Apr '17

21 Apr '17

Thought I would pass something along to the group, and see if anyone is interested. While I have been working on perfecting my dual HT handheld satellite operation methods, I discovered that I simply don't have enough hand's, ears, and eye's for everything. With this limitation in mind, I designed a simple circuit board to interface a headset with a pair of HT's, and an audio recorder. The board as designed can interface to a pair of FT-60's via 3.5mm TRRS cables, or a VX-8 with Yaesu's CT-M11 cable. RX audio is sent to a stereo headset (in mono, of course) and to one channel of a stereo recorder. Microphone audio from the headset mic is sent to the TX radio and to the other channel of the stereo recorder. This way, the recorder should capture both sides of the QSO without issue. The recorder has 2 pot's for level adjustment of both the TX and RX audio levels to the recorder. I also included a trimpot to adjust the bias level of the microphone, should one wish to lower it for any reason, as well as a header to install a PTT switch. My plan was to mount a momentary switch on a handle I plan to make for my arrow antenna. I will have 2 extra boards available in a few weeks time when they get back from my board fab house. If anyone is interested, I can drop one of these extra's in the mail, and I would ask for about $25 for them. I can make more if there is a large interest from the group. Enjoy. Mike, AE0MT.

1 0

Satellite SDR: Seeing IS NOT Hearing
by Clayton Coleman 21 Apr '17

21 Apr '17

I happen to be a fan of using Software Defined Radio (SDR) to receive amateur satellites. It is an inexpensive way to view all the signals appearing on a satellite's passband simultaneously. While I don't normally run SDR full time at my station, from time to time I use it to monitor activity on busy satellite passes because I can view and record all activity. As a result of more people using SDR on satellites, I have discovered an operating trait that warrants some discussion and evaluation. On more than one occasion, I have given a call to a very specific station, and instead of my intended target had another SDR-based station appear on frequency immediately saying "QRZ? QRZ?" rather than wait and listen to who is calling on the frequency. The SDR user saw a signal on their waterfall and clicked on it. They "pounced" on what they perceived to be another station looking to make contact which might not necessarily be the case. I've see the same thing happen a few times with pileups. There is an existing pileup in progress when the SDR station comes into the footprint. Rather than wait a short period to listen, they click on the new signal in their waterfall, and immediately proceed to "QRZ" on the frequency of the pileup, sometimes interrupting the flow of existing contacts. Just today I heard this scenario: Station 1 calls CQ. Station 2 went to answer. The SDR user clicked on the waterfall, heard only part of the callsign of Station 2, and proceeded to call Station 2, ignoring the possibility that Station 2 was attempting to QSO with someone else. It seems to me the visual nature of SDR waterfalls is causing a temporary lapse in judgement when it comes to a basic ham radio principle that we apply to satellite operating -- listen with our ears before transmitting. SDR is a great listening tool. With great power comes great responsibility. 73 Clayton W5PFG

5 4

Hard times for satellite radio buyers?
by Ken M 21 Apr '17

21 Apr '17

Hello all, Is it not hard times for new and prospective satellite operators (like me) in terms of equipment choices, at least in terms of the "big three"? (And, to be clear, I'm talking about current, in-production models only.) I'm looking for an HF base/mobile radio, and also a VHF/UHF-only all-mode base/mobile radio that I can use for the linear satellites but - wait - there are no VHF/UHF-only all mode radios! That means I need to buy a "shack in a box" but - wait - there are only two choices (at what I will call moderate prices), the ancient TS-2000 and equally ancient FT-857D. There is the new and somewhat more expensive FT-991A and, although that sounds like a very good radio, for HF at that price point I might prefer the IC-7300 but that would mean no satellite work. I'm also looking for a portable HF QRP radio, and a portable radio I can use for the linear satellites. Again the venerable but ancient FT-817ND is pretty much the only game in town. As with the HF base radios above, if I am only interested in HF QRP I would probably rather put my money toward a KX2 or KX3 of newer design but, again, that would mean no satellite work. So as a new operator, to get into linear satellites it seems I am forced to either (1) troll the swap meets for ancient gear; (2) buy new gear of old design (which in my mind is even worse); or (3) buy new gear of modern design that works for satellite and HF, but is not necessarily the radio I would choose for HF alone. I should add that the situation is not much better for HT/mobile radios for the FM satellites, but at least there are some cost effective workarounds including the less expensive Baofeng/Wouxun/Tytera radios and their clones. Thanks for indulging my shopping frustrations, and my inexperience, but I have to think there are others new to the hobby that are having similar thoughts. Do Amsat members see this as a problem? Probably off to spend some new money on an old radio... 73 - Ken - VA7KBM

11 12

Re: [amsat-bb] Help with 2-meter ISS packet performance?
by Scott 20 Apr '17

20 Apr '17

I’ve gotten a number of excellent replies to my question, but since they were all off-list, I thought I would post a short summary in case anyone else was interested. One reply that taught me a lot referenced the situation that has already been discussed regarding the very large volume of traffic being directed towards the ISS since it returned to 145.825. As explained in the note, if a digipeater is flooded with transmissions to the point that many (most?) cannot be decoded, then naturally it has nothing to re-transmit back over the air. That is a very valid explanation for why I might not be HEARD, nor receive very much on the downlink. And my iGate certainly can’t forward much to the website if successful digipeats are way down. While that might explain the situation over the Eastern US, I got a “same situation here” from Australia. So, I have to continue wondering if it’s more than just congestion. Another ham that is seeing closer to normal performance is operating at higher power than many of us. So, that is another vote in the direction of a “too busy” receiver on the ISS with only a few contacts getting through. Time will tell; I just wanted to share those informative off-list comments. Many thanks to all who replied. -Scott -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Scott wrote: > Hello everyone. > > While the ISS packet digipeater is off for the crew docking today, I > thought it might be a good time to see what I could learn from the group > in regard to the rather drastic reduction in performance (both ways - TX & > RX) that I've seen since the Space Station's digipeater moved back to > 2-meters. > > I noticed this from day-1 and might have even commented on it previously. > But now that some time has passed and a good number of you reading this > have had your own experiences with the ISS back on 2-meters, I had to > bring it up again. > > I realize that is a complete apples/oranges situation... different radios > & antennas on BOTH ends, different band propagation, etc., etc. But here > is my dilemma... > > While I have been enjoying the very positive reports from many of you, I > have also been in touch with some hams from various locations that, like > me, can't buy a connection. And unlike myself, these are experienced > operators who regularly could connect to the ISS on 70cm across perhaps > half the width of the U.S. Also, to the best of my knowledge, these same > amateurs were very successful on 2-meter packet to the ISS before the > original radio failed. > > So yes, I know this is like asking why two different cars drive > differently, but as I said my confusion is how and why others are seeing > so much success. One more stick on the fire is that my iGate is also > basically deaf now, even though I have put it on an appropriate 2m antenna > and of course changed the frequency settings. I was enjoying an > exceptional number of iGate relays to the website on 70cm, but next to > zero on 2m. > > (Please let me add that my 2-meter packet setup works very well to a local > digipeater or on terrestrial APRS. Also, my iGate hears extremely well if > I move it to 144.39) > > Getting digipeated is fun, but frankly I would be happy to just HEAR the > thing again. So, I don’t really think it’s competition on the band & some > of us not being heard, but rather something more in the RF arena. > > As always, observations and suggestions from everyone are appreciated! > > -Scott, K4KDR > Montpelier, VA USA

1 0

Help with 2-meter ISS packet performance?
by Scott 20 Apr '17

20 Apr '17

Hello everyone. While the ISS packet digipeater is off for the crew docking today, I thought it might be a good time to see what I could learn from the group in regard to the rather drastic reduction in performance (both ways - TX & RX) that I've seen since the Space Station's digipeater moved back to 2-meters. I noticed this from day-1 and might have even commented on it previously. But now that some time has passed and a good number of you reading this have had your own experiences with the ISS back on 2-meters, I had to bring it up again. I realize that is a complete apples/oranges situation... different radios & antennas on BOTH ends, different band propagation, etc., etc. But here is my dilemma... While I have been enjoying the very positive reports from many of you, I have also been in touch with some hams from various locations that, like me, can't buy a connection. And unlike myself, these are experienced operators who regularly could connect to the ISS on 70cm across perhaps half the width of the U.S. Also, to the best of my knowledge, these same amateurs were very successful on 2-meter packet to the ISS before the original radio failed. So yes, I know this is like asking why two different cars drive differently, but as I said my confusion is how and why others are seeing so much success. One more stick on the fire is that my iGate is also basically deaf now, even though I have put it on an appropriate 2m antenna and of course changed the frequency settings. I was enjoying an exceptional number of iGate relays to the website on 70cm, but next to zero on 2m. (Please let me add that my 2-meter packet setup works very well to a local digipeater or on terrestrial APRS. Also, my iGate hears extremely well if I move it to 144.39) Getting digipeated is fun, but frankly I would be happy to just HEAR the thing again. So, I don’t really think it’s competition on the band & some of us not being heard, but rather something more in the RF arena. As always, observations and suggestions from everyone are appreciated! -Scott, K4KDR Montpelier, VA USA

1 0

2 Hamvention tickets available
by Clayton Coleman 20 Apr '17

20 Apr '17

I purchased two Hamvention tickets at $22 each, $44 total, online but I will not be able to attend. I will sell both shipped via USPS Priority mail for $34. Payment via PayPal only. 73 Clayton W5PFG

1 1

Interesting article, space.com
by Vince Fiscus, KB7ADL 20 Apr '17

20 Apr '17

Could Cubesats Trigger a Space Junk Apocalypse? http://www.space.com/36506-cubesats-space-junk-apocalypse.html Time to start building Heo's again... Hoping. KB7ADL

1 0